• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

替代决策者对重症患者可预防的护理失误的看法:一项定性研究。

Surrogate decision makers' perspectives on preventable breakdowns in care among critically ill patients: A qualitative study.

作者信息

Fisher Kimberly A, Ahmad Sumera, Jackson Madeline, Mazor Kathleen M

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA 01655, USA; Meyers Primary Care Institute, 425 North Lake Avenue, Worcester, MA 01605, USA.

Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA 01655, USA.

出版信息

Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Oct;99(10):1685-93. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.03.027. Epub 2016 Mar 26.

DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2016.03.027
PMID:27067065
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To describe surrogate decision makers' (SDMs) perspectives on preventable breakdowns in care among critically ill patients.

METHODS

We screened 70 SDMs of critically ill patients for those who identified a preventable breakdown in care, defined as an event where the SDM believes something "went wrong", that could have been prevented, and resulted in harm. In-depth interviews were conducted with SDMs who identified an eligible event.

RESULTS

32 of 70 participants (46%) identified at least one preventable breakdown in care, with a total of 75 discrete events. Types of breakdowns involved medical care (n=52), communication (n=59), and both (n=40). Four additional breakdowns were related to problems with SDM bedside access to the patient. Adverse consequences of breakdowns included physical harm, need for additional medical care, emotional distress, pain, suffering, loss of trust, life disruption, impaired decision making, and financial expense. 28 of 32 SDMs raised their concerns with clinicians, yet only 25% were satisfactorily addressed.

CONCLUSION

SDMs of critically ill patients frequently identify preventable breakdowns in care which result in harm.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

An in-depth understanding of the types of events SDMs find problematic and the associated harms is an important step towards improving the safety and patient-centeredness of healthcare.

摘要

目的

描述替代决策者(SDM)对重症患者可预防的护理失误的看法。

方法

我们对70名重症患者的替代决策者进行筛查,找出那些认为存在可预防的护理失误的人,可预防的护理失误定义为替代决策者认为某件“出了问题”的事件,该事件本可预防并导致了伤害。对确定存在符合条件事件的替代决策者进行了深入访谈。

结果

70名参与者中有32名(46%)确定了至少一次可预防的护理失误,共有75起不同的事件。失误类型包括医疗护理(n = 52)、沟通(n = 59)以及两者皆有(n = 40)。另外四起失误与替代决策者在床边接触患者时遇到的问题有关。失误的不良后果包括身体伤害、需要额外的医疗护理、情绪困扰、疼痛、痛苦、信任丧失、生活 disrupted、决策受损和经济费用。32名替代决策者中有28名向临床医生表达了他们的担忧,但只有25%得到了满意的解决。

结论

重症患者的替代决策者经常发现导致伤害的可预防的护理失误。

实践意义

深入了解替代决策者认为有问题的事件类型以及相关危害是提高医疗保健安全性和以患者为中心程度的重要一步。

相似文献

1
Surrogate decision makers' perspectives on preventable breakdowns in care among critically ill patients: A qualitative study.替代决策者对重症患者可预防的护理失误的看法:一项定性研究。
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Oct;99(10):1685-93. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.03.027. Epub 2016 Mar 26.
2
Factors affecting stress experienced by surrogate decision makers for critically ill patients: implications for nursing practice.影响重症患者替代决策者所经历压力的因素:对护理实践的启示
Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2014 Apr;30(2):77-85. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2013.08.008. Epub 2013 Nov 7.
3
The Experience of Surrogate Decision Makers on Being Approached for Consent for Patient Participation in Research. A Multicenter Study.代理决策者在被征求患者参与研究同意时的经历。一项多中心研究。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017 Feb;14(2):238-245. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201606-425OC.
4
Toward patient-centered cancer care: patient perceptions of problematic events, impact, and response.迈向以患者为中心的癌症护理:患者对问题事件的看法、影响和反应。
J Clin Oncol. 2012 May 20;30(15):1784-90. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.1384. Epub 2012 Apr 16.
5
We Want to Know: Eliciting Hospitalized Patients' Perspectives on Breakdowns in Care.我们想了解:探寻住院患者对护理失误的看法。
J Hosp Med. 2017 Aug;12(8):603-609. doi: 10.12788/jhm.2783.
6
Surrogate decision makers' attitudes towards research decision making for critically ill patients.代理人决策制定者对危重症患者研究决策的态度。
Intensive Care Med. 2012 Oct;38(10):1616-23. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2625-x. Epub 2012 Jul 24.
7
Surgeon Communication and Family Understanding of Patient Prognosis in Critically Ill Surgical Patients: A Qualitative Investigation Informs Resident Training.外科医生与重症外科患者家属对患者预后的沟通:一项定性研究为住院医师培训提供信息。
J Surg Educ. 2019 Nov-Dec;76(6):e77-e91. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2019.05.017. Epub 2019 Jul 29.
8
Barriers and Facilitators of Surrogates Providing Consent for Critically Ill Patients in Clinical Trials: A Qualitative Study.代表重病患者参与临床试验时的同意书提供:定性研究中的障碍和促进因素。
Chest. 2024 Aug;166(2):304-310. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2024.02.027. Epub 2024 Feb 20.
9
What Families Need and Physicians Deliver: Contrasting Communication Preferences Between Surrogate Decision-Makers and Physicians During Outcome Prognostication in Critically Ill TBI Patients.家属的需求和医生的提供:在重症脑损伤患者预后判断中,代理决策者和医生之间沟通偏好的对比。
Neurocrit Care. 2017 Oct;27(2):154-162. doi: 10.1007/s12028-017-0427-2.
10
Preventable harm occurring to critically ill children.危重症儿童发生的可预防伤害。
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2007 Jul;8(4):331-6. doi: 10.1097/01.PCC.0000263042.73539.99.

引用本文的文献

1
Adverse events and perceived abandonment: learning from patients' accounts of medical mishaps.不良事件和感知遗弃:从患者对医疗事故的描述中吸取教训。
BMJ Open Qual. 2024 Aug 15;13(3):e002848. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002848.
2
Patient, carer and family experiences of seeking redress and reconciliation following a life-changing event: Systematic review of qualitative evidence.患者、照顾者和家属在经历改变生活的事件后寻求赔偿和和解的体验:系统评价定性证据。
Health Expect. 2023 Dec;26(6):2127-2150. doi: 10.1111/hex.13820. Epub 2023 Jul 14.
3
Communicating with patients about breakdowns in care: a national randomised vignette-based survey.
与患者沟通医疗护理失败问题:一项全国性基于随机案例的调查。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2020 Apr;29(4):313-319. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009712. Epub 2019 Nov 13.
4
Video-Based Communication Assessment: Development of an Innovative System for Assessing Clinician-Patient Communication.基于视频的沟通评估:一种用于评估临床医生与患者沟通的创新系统的开发
JMIR Med Educ. 2019 Feb 14;5(1):e10400. doi: 10.2196/10400.
5
We want to know: patient comfort speaking up about breakdowns in care and patient experience.我们想知道:患者在谈及护理失误和患者体验时的舒适度。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Mar;28(3):190-197. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008159. Epub 2018 Sep 29.
6
Speaking up about care concerns in the ICU: patient and family experiences, attitudes and perceived barriers.在 ICU 中表达对护理的关注:患者和家属的经历、态度和感知障碍。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Nov;27(11):928-936. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007525. Epub 2018 Jul 12.
7
We Want to Know: Eliciting Hospitalized Patients' Perspectives on Breakdowns in Care.我们想了解:探寻住院患者对护理失误的看法。
J Hosp Med. 2017 Aug;12(8):603-609. doi: 10.12788/jhm.2783.